Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan MacDonald (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Celtae. –MuZemike 01:00, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan MacDonald

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can not find sufficient reliable sources independent of the subject to establish notability. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. At the first AfD for this page the only source offered was his band's site. J04n(talk page) 23:43, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 23:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —Argolin (talk) 09:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- for reasons given in first AfD- JJJ999 (talk) 23:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(I added some sources since the AfD was initiated.) I'd suggest keeping most of the info in some form, since Celtae is a notable band (meets WP:BAND criterion #1): The Telegram has written about them, and the Ottawa Citizen and Exclaim! have album reviews [1]. It's somewhat questionable whether MacDonald is notable enough separately for an article, so a merge might be best. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:41, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep or new article on the band. Border-line notable here, just enough coverage and the national debate championship as well. Although Celtae should get at least some article as Paul Erik suggested above so that in the case it ends up with a merge or a delete, the info on this article should be included on a band's article. JForget 13:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, if there is no objection I would like to rename this Celtae and move it to the incubator to be better developed. J04n(talk page) 13:39, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I just wrote a new article on Celtae, just a start, but I think Nathan MacDonald should be merged there. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 22:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the band article, but I'm not sure about the notability of the band!Farhikht (talk) 15:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - In a lot of cases I would vote delete in articles like these, but his history (especially being the winner of a debate tournament) just pushes him above the very blurry line of notability. — Parent5446 ☯ ^{(msg email)} 19:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Paul Erik. Even the band is admittedly kind of borderline, but there's no real need to keep both. Bearcat (talk) 04:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.